Since as early as 1963, the United Sates Supreme Court has issued several decisions regarding officer misconduct with in the criminal justice system. The Court has continually recognized the importance of addressing these issues in order to assure that defendants have access to all available information during trial. Three major case decisions that address these issues are Brady v. Maryland (1963), Giglio v. United States (1972), and United States v. Agurs (1976). The following is a summary of those cases and how they are related to the issue of ethics in law enforcement.
Perhaps the most important landmark decision of the group was decided from a 1963 Maryland murder case in Brady v. Maryland. The major issue surrounding this case was …show more content…
Due to the ruling, many officers of the court have had ethical issues raised against them in regards to the truthfulness of their testimony during court proceedings. Also, police officers that have been caught lying in official capacity are added to what is known as the “Brady List.” This prior misconduct must be disclosed to the defense and can be used against the officer in attempt to impeach him at trial. Effectively, an officer is of little to no use once they have made such a list. The only available assignment that remains for that officer is often an administrative or desk duty, never again to be involved in investigating …show more content…
United States. Giglio was prosecuted for numerous counts of theft and forgery when he fictitiously passed $2,300 in fraudulent money orders. In exchange for his testimony, an accomplice (Taliento) was offered immunity for his testimony against Giglio during trial. This deal brokered by the prosecutor was withheld from the jury, as such the defendant claimed his due process rights were violated. The key issue of this case was in regard to witness credibility; without the co-defendant’s statement the prosecution had no case. Thus, the Court ruled, “When the reliability of a given witness may be determinative of guilt or innocence, nondisclosure of evidence affecting credibility falls within this general rule" (Giglio v. United States, 1972). In matters regarding to witness credibility, this case demands that all information – good or bad - pertaining to a witness must be disclosed prior to
Perhaps the most important landmark decision of the group was decided from a 1963 Maryland murder case in Brady v. Maryland. The major issue surrounding this case was …show more content…
Due to the ruling, many officers of the court have had ethical issues raised against them in regards to the truthfulness of their testimony during court proceedings. Also, police officers that have been caught lying in official capacity are added to what is known as the “Brady List.” This prior misconduct must be disclosed to the defense and can be used against the officer in attempt to impeach him at trial. Effectively, an officer is of little to no use once they have made such a list. The only available assignment that remains for that officer is often an administrative or desk duty, never again to be involved in investigating …show more content…
United States. Giglio was prosecuted for numerous counts of theft and forgery when he fictitiously passed $2,300 in fraudulent money orders. In exchange for his testimony, an accomplice (Taliento) was offered immunity for his testimony against Giglio during trial. This deal brokered by the prosecutor was withheld from the jury, as such the defendant claimed his due process rights were violated. The key issue of this case was in regard to witness credibility; without the co-defendant’s statement the prosecution had no case. Thus, the Court ruled, “When the reliability of a given witness may be determinative of guilt or innocence, nondisclosure of evidence affecting credibility falls within this general rule" (Giglio v. United States, 1972). In matters regarding to witness credibility, this case demands that all information – good or bad - pertaining to a witness must be disclosed prior to